IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Tata Sia Airlines Limited – Appellant
Versus
Vistara Buildtech Llp & Anr. – Respondents
CS(COMM) 116 of 2023
Decided On : 29-05-2023
Trademark - Settlement Agreement - The court decreed the suit in terms of the settlement agreement dated 3rd May 2023, by which the defendants acknowledged the plaintiff's trademark and undertook to cease all use of the impugned marks and withdraw trademark applications.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute between the parties was settled through a Settlement Agreement dated 3rd May 2023 executed under the aegis of the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the terms of settlement to be lawful and in order, and decreed the suit in terms of the settlement agreement, by which the parties shall remain bound.
Issues: The issues of infringement of trademark, passing off, dilution, tarnishment, damages, rendition of account, and delivery up were compromised by the parties through the settlement agreement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lawful and binding nature of the settlement agreement, by which the defendants acknowledged the plaintiff's trademark and undertook to cease all use of the impugned marks and withdraw trademark applications.
Final Decision: The suit stands decreed in terms of the settlement agreement dated 3rd May 2023, and the plaintiff shall be entitled to a refund of court fees, if any, deposited by it.
ORDER (Oral)
1. The dispute between the parties stands settled vide Settlement Agreement dated 3rd May 2023 executed under the aegis of the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.
2. The Settlement Agreement is on record.
3. The terms of settlement contained therein are as under:
"1. The Defendants acknowledge and recognise that the Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the well-known mark VISTARA.
2. The Defendants undertake to cease all use of the impugned marks VISTARA, [IMG] VISTARA BUILDTECH, [IMG]/VISTARA JOYVILLE, [IMG], VISTARA HAPPINEST, [IMG]/VISTARA MIDTOWN and [IMG] VISTARA URBANO ("Impugned Marks") or any mark deceptively similar thereto.
3. The Defendants undertake to takedown/destroy all signages, pamphlets, advertising material etc. wherein the Impugned Marks are being used/displayed/affixed.
4. The Defendants undertake to remove the Impugned Marks from all social media and/or third party websites.
5. The Defendants undertake to withdraw the trademark application numbers 4854023, 4854024, 4854019, 4854020, 4854021, 4854022, 5396080 and 5396409 for the Impugned Marks. The Defendant shall within seven days make appropriate applications to the Trademark Registry to withdraw the above trademark applications.
6. The Defendants undertake that they do not have any other trademark application/registration for the Impugned Mark and/or any other mark similar to the Plaintiffs well known VISTARA trademark.
7. The Defendants undertake that in future, they will not file any other trademark/copyright application for the Impugned Mark and/or any other mark similar to the Plaintiffs well known VISTARA trademark.
8. The Defendants undertake that they have not filed any copyright application for the Impugned Mark and/or any other mark similar to the Plaintiffs well known VISTARA trademark. If a copyright application has been filed or a copyright registration has been obtained, the Defendants undertake to file requests for withdrawal/cancellation of the said application/registration, as the case may be.
9. The Plaintiff has no objection if any existing licenses, registrations, revenue records, permissions etc. from any authority are transferred or changed, as the case may be, to a new name adopted by the Defendants, i.e., 'VELORA BUILDTECH'. To reiterate, the Plaintiff has no objection if the permissions, registrations, revenue records, licenses etc. under the name of 'VISTARA BUILDTECH' or 'VISTARA INFRATECH' or 'VISTARA BUILDTECH LLP' etc. are transferred or changed to the name of, as the case may be, to the new name adopted by the Defendants 'VELORA BUILDTECH'.
10. The Defendant shall within 30 days of signing of this agreement apply to the concerned departments like Registrar of companies or Registrar of firms, RERA etc. for the change of names or transfer as the case maybe. The Defendants, as soon as they apply for change of name, shall intimate to the Plaintiff of such application for change of name along with copies of supporting documents. In case the name is not changed within 4 months than the Defendants shall duly inform the Plaintiff of the same Stating the reasons thereof.
11. That the Defendant undertakes to this Hon'ble Court to abide by the terms and conditions of this Settlement.
12. On the basis of the above undertakings, the Plaintiff agreed to not seek any costs/damages from the Defendants.
13. The undertaking given herein shall be binding on all the legal heirs, representatives, assigns-in-business of both the parties henceforth.
14. That parties have agreed that the said commercial suit for infringement of trademark, passing off, dilution and tarnishment, damages; rendition of account; delivery up, etc. being CS (COMM) No. 116 of 2023 may be disposed of as compromised by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in view of the terms and conditions of the present settlement agreement."
4. The parties are represented by learned Counsel who undertake on behalf of their respective clients to abide by the terms of se
The court's decision was influenced by the binding nature of the settlement agreement, which required the defendants to acknowledge the plaintiff's trademark and cease all use of the impugned marks.
Settlement of disputes under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC and the court's authority to decree suits based on lawful settlement terms.
Enforceability of settlement agreements and their impact on the resolution of disputes.
Enforceability of settlement agreement under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC.
Settlement agreements can effectively resolve disputes in trademark infringement cases, allowing parties to acknowledge rights and agree on actions to prevent future violations.
The court has the authority to examine and decree a suit based on the terms of settlement between the parties under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC.
The judgment confirms the acknowledgment of trademark ownership and sets enforcement measures against infringement, emphasizing settlement agreements under the CPC.
The main legal point established is the enforceability of the terms of settlement under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC in settling the trade mark dispute.
Enforcement of settlement terms and direction to cancel infringing marks by the Trade Marks Registry
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.